The NationStates Feminist Thread

[Jute]

Why?
Criticism of PIV is not being PIV-negative, it's just about thinking that PIV shouldn't be the default sex.
Criticism of PIV is criticism of heteronormativity.

Fuck No, I'm not taking your bullshit!

You're wrong! Suck it up!

Hell no

Just no...no!

Fuck No!

I'm not hearing this Chessmistress, I will not go into thirty pages of having to debate this.

The Club of Chessmistress Defeats is already to crowded as is, and they already ran out of pigs in a blanket.

No rational human being can argue against PIV, if you do you're not rational.

This is one of the central building blocks of reproduction, instinct, etc.

You can't even allude to rape as it is by definition, because thats a no brainier.

Its like you all think women are these brainless morons who can't think for themselves, and can't possibly believe that what they want, is of their own desires.

No, its all on the fucking patiraitcilluminati lizard men.

What the fuck do you even mean by hertronormative anyways?

What, you want a straight couple to do some weird scissor thing when not aiming to make a baby...or is childbirth oppression too?

God dammit Chess...this is the exact reason I am not a Feminist, because they let you're kind of people run wild, speak at the UN...or write numerous articles talking about how a poor millionaire feminist is oppressed, more than that stupid cishet homeless man about to hang himself.

I hate Progressives, I hate feminist, they push reasonable people way from actual Liberalism and Egalitarianism, and the last thing I want to see in this world is a rise in the social right.

At least in the good ole US of A.

Historically, wasn't feminism up until some time ago the only, or at least the most important, movement to actually support gender egalitarianism by fighting for women to get the same rights and duties as men?

Heteronormativity means traditional gender roles (there's only two sexes, they are identical with the two genders, there's only one "normal" sexual orientation, etc.)

[Valystria]

Fuck No, I'm not taking your bullshit!

You're wrong! Suck it up!

Hell no

Just no...no!

Fuck No!

I'm not hearing this Chessmistress, I will not go into thirty pages of having to debate this.

The Club of Chessmistress Defeats is already to crowded as is, and they already ran out of pigs in a blanket.

No rational human being can argue against PIV, if you do you're not rational.

This is one of the central building blocks of reproduction, instinct, etc.

You can't even allude to rape as it is by definition, because thats a no brainier.

Its like you all think women are these brainless morons who can't think for themselves, and can't possibly believe that what they want, is of their own desires.

No, its all on the fucking patiraitcilluminati lizard men.

What the fuck do you even mean by hertronormative anyways?

What, you want a straight couple to do some weird scissor thing when not aiming to make a baby...or is childbirth oppression too?

God dammit Chess...this is the exact reason I am not a Feminist, because they let you're kind of people run wild, speak at the UN...or write numerous articles talking about how a poor millionaire feminist is oppressed, more than that stupid cishet homeless man about to hang himself.

I hate Progressives, I hate feminist, they push reasonable people way from actual Liberalism and Egalitarianism, and the last thing I want to see in this world is a rise in the social right.

At least in the good ole US of A.

Historically, wasn't feminism up until some time ago the only, or at least the most important, movement to actually support gender egalitarianism by fighting for women to get the same rights and duties as men?

Exclusively supporting the advancement of women's rights to be equal with men's rights is not the same as supporting gender egalitarianism. It's a false equivalency.

[Fin Dovah Junaar]

Fuck No, I'm not taking your bullshit!

You're wrong! Suck it up!

Hell no

Just no...no!

Fuck No!

I'm not hearing this Chessmistress, I will not go into thirty pages of having to debate this.

The Club of Chessmistress Defeats is already to crowded as is, and they already ran out of pigs in a blanket.

No rational human being can argue against PIV, if you do you're not rational.

This is one of the central building blocks of reproduction, instinct, etc.

You can't even allude to rape as it is by definition, because thats a no brainier.

Its like you all think women are these brainless morons who can't think for themselves, and can't possibly believe that what they want, is of their own desires.

No, its all on the fucking patiraitcilluminati lizard men.

What the fuck do you even mean by hertronormative anyways?

What, you want a straight couple to do some weird scissor thing when not aiming to make a baby...or is childbirth oppression too?

God dammit Chess...this is the exact reason I am not a Feminist, because they let you're kind of people run wild, speak at the UN...or write numerous articles talking about how a poor millionaire feminist is oppressed, more than that stupid cishet homeless man about to hang himself.

I hate Progressives, I hate feminist, they push reasonable people way from actual Liberalism and Egalitarianism, and the last thing I want to see in this world is a rise in the social right.

At least in the good ole US of A.

Historically, wasn't feminism up until some time ago the only, or at least the most important, movement to actually support gender egalitarianism by fighting for women to get the same rights and duties as men?

Perhaps...perhaps...although from my memory even it has its own issues, primarily the first wave being more for just white women or something...but yes, perhaps.

But I'll just hand you that in order to get to this.

Even if its 100% unquestionably true, that is not the case of this generation of feminism.

[Valystria]

The whole PIV thing reminds me why I have formed a negative view of the movement as a whole.

Why?
Criticism of PIV is not being PIV-negative, it's just about thinking that PIV shouldn't be the default sex.
Criticism of PIV is criticism of heteronormativity.

Check that
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php? ... 6585301561
It's not against PIV

Can I still have PIV if I want to?
Of course! It’s a free country. Not all women hate PIV; some don’t mind it; some even enjoy it. Most women who enjoy it enjoy clitoris stimulation more. But everyone’s an individual and we all get pleasure in different ways.

Oh, hi there. I see you're back to refusing to answer questions which prove you wrong.

When it happened?
Just only an year ago the full criminalisation of purchasers was rejected.

Stop ignoring posts you don't want to answer.

And you didn't answer the question at all. You said what the Convention of Istanbul is about. You didn't answer how "If feminists lack power then how can they get things like the Convention of Istanbul passed?

Do tell us.

[The Serbian Empire]

Fuck No, I'm not taking your bullshit!

You're wrong! Suck it up!

Hell no

Just no...no!

Fuck No!

I'm not hearing this Chessmistress, I will not go into thirty pages of having to debate this.

The Club of Chessmistress Defeats is already to crowded as is, and they already ran out of pigs in a blanket.

No rational human being can argue against PIV, if you do you're not rational.

This is one of the central building blocks of reproduction, instinct, etc.

You can't even allude to rape as it is by definition, because thats a no brainier.

Its like you all think women are these brainless morons who can't think for themselves, and can't possibly believe that what they want, is of their own desires.

No, its all on the fucking patiraitcilluminati lizard men.

What the fuck do you even mean by hertronormative anyways?

What, you want a straight couple to do some weird scissor thing when not aiming to make a baby...or is childbirth oppression too?

God dammit Chess...this is the exact reason I am not a Feminist, because they let you're kind of people run wild, speak at the UN...or write numerous articles talking about how a poor millionaire feminist is oppressed, more than that stupid cishet homeless man about to hang himself.

I hate Progressives, I hate feminist, they push reasonable people way from actual Liberalism and Egalitarianism, and the last thing I want to see in this world is a rise in the social right.

At least in the good ole US of A.

Historically, wasn't feminism up until some time ago the only, or at least the most important, movement to actually support gender egalitarianism by fighting for women to get the same rights and duties as men?

Heteronormativity means traditional gender roles (there's only two sexes, they are identical with the two genders, there's only one "normal" sexual orientation, etc.)

Now we've entered to the point where feminism's big things are manspreading and other petty issues.

[Jute]

Historically, wasn't feminism up until some time ago the only, or at least the most important, movement to actually support gender egalitarianism by fighting for women to get the same rights and duties as men?

Heteronormativity means traditional gender roles (there's only two sexes, they are identical with the two genders, there's only one "normal" sexual orientation, etc.)

Now we've entered to the point where feminism's big things are manspreading and other petty issues.

Nah, that's just what gets published. Like how "liberals" are allegedly outraged over the new Taylor Swift video, even though the outrage over the alleged outrage far exceeds it.

[Valystria]

Historically, wasn't feminism up until some time ago the only, or at least the most important, movement to actually support gender egalitarianism by fighting for women to get the same rights and duties as men?

Heteronormativity means traditional gender roles (there's only two sexes, they are identical with the two genders, there's only one "normal" sexual orientation, etc.)

Now we've entered to the point where feminism's big things are manspreading and other petty issues.

That's what happens when they run out of actual things to do. They focus on pettiness.

[The Serbian Empire]

Now we've entered to the point where feminism's big things are manspreading and other petty issues.

Nah, that's just what gets published. Like how "liberals" are allegedly outraged over the new Taylor Swift video, even though the outrage over the alleged outrage far exceeds it.

The problem is the outrage about these feminists who are irritated by manspreading actually comes from anti-feminists.

[Jute]

Historically, wasn't feminism up until some time ago the only, or at least the most important, movement to actually support gender egalitarianism by fighting for women to get the same rights and duties as men?

Perhaps...perhaps...although from my memory even it has its own issues, primarily the first wave being more for just white women or something...but yes, perhaps.

But I'll just hand you that in order to get to this.

Even if its 100% unquestionably true, that is not the case of this generation of feminism.

Each generation of feminism had it's problems, I guess. The first one wasn't really all that inclusive of anyone not seen as "white". The second saw the beginning of "radical", exclusionary feminism. The third one isn't even taken seriously anymore for a large part because of that, it seems.

[Fin Dovah Junaar]

Now we've entered to the point where feminism's big things are manspreading and other petty issues.

Nah, that's just what gets published. Like how "liberals" are allegedly outraged over the new Taylor Swift video, even though the outrage over the alleged outrage far exceeds it.

The reason why outrage of outrage can be bigger is probably up to how far the initial outrage is spread, thus gaining more attention than the initial subject.

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

What the fuck do you even mean by hertronormative anyways?

heteronormativity means there are two gender role and two sex roles, and heterosexuality is the "norm".

[Jute]

Nah, that's just what gets published. Like how "liberals" are allegedly outraged over the new Taylor Swift video, even though the outrage over the alleged outrage far exceeds it.

The problem is the outrage about these feminists who are irritated by manspreading actually comes from anti-feminists.

That's what I mean. Some feminists make a few posts about something like that, give it a "tongue-in-cheek" name, and then some other people make it seem like that's all they do nowadays and take it as proof they don't have anything better to do.

[Jute]

Nah, that's just what gets published. Like how "liberals" are allegedly outraged over the new Taylor Swift video, even though the outrage over the alleged outrage far exceeds it.

The reason why outrage of outrage can be bigger is probably up to how far the initial outrage is spread, thus gaining more attention than the initial subject.

Sometimes the initial outrage is outright fabricated, exaggerated from a single or two critical posts, too.

[Valystria]

Perhaps...perhaps...although from my memory even it has its own issues, primarily the first wave being more for just white women or something...but yes, perhaps.

But I'll just hand you that in order to get to this.

Even if its 100% unquestionably true, that is not the case of this generation of feminism.

Each generation of feminism had it's problems, I guess. The first one wasn't really all that inclusive of anyone not seen as "white". The second saw the beginning of "radical", exclusionary feminism. The third one isn't even taken seriously anymore for a large part because of that, it seems.

No, the first was already exclusionary. Moderates have always been a minority throughout the movement's history. If not on outright minority, certainly on the losing side almost consistently.

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

Perhaps...perhaps...although from my memory even it has its own issues, primarily the first wave being more for just white women or something...but yes, perhaps.

But I'll just hand you that in order to get to this.

Even if its 100% unquestionably true, that is not the case of this generation of feminism.

Each generation of feminism had it's problems, I guess. The first one wasn't really all that inclusive of anyone not seen as "white". The second saw the beginning of "radical", exclusionary feminism. The third one isn't even taken seriously anymore for a large part because of that, it seems.

Second wave feminism took place in Europe and parts of Asia, as sexuality, family, the workplace, reproductive rights, de facto inequalities, and official legal inequalities were the 'main points."

[Valystria]

What the fuck do you even mean by hertronormative anyways?

heteronormativity means there are two gender role and two sex roles, and heterosexuality is the "norm".

It has a bit more to it than that. Heteronormativity is a belief system that includes the two genders having a complementary role to each other in addition to what you've mentioned. Taking away that slight distinction results in something that looks like heteronormativity but isn't heteronormativity.

So, when you see a radical feminist saying they are against heteronormativity, that's because they want to replace it with something exactly like heteronormativity other than men no longer having a complementary gender role alongside women.

[Krayd]

The problem is the outrage about these feminists who are irritated by manspreading actually comes from anti-feminists.

That's what I mean. Some feminists make a few posts about something like that, give it a "tongue-in-cheek" name, and then some other people make it seem like that's all they do nowadays and take it as proof they don't have anything better to do.

When the first man was arrested for it on the BART, the outrage over the outrage became justified.

[Krayd]

Now we've entered to the point where feminism's big things are manspreading and other petty issues.

Nah, that's just what gets published. Like how "liberals" are allegedly outraged over the new Taylor Swift video, even though the outrage over the alleged outrage far exceeds it.

Any time spent on a liberal arts campus will show that first-world feminism's increasing pettiness is less an exaggeration than a growing problem.

[Jute]

Each generation of feminism had it's problems, I guess. The first one wasn't really all that inclusive of anyone not seen as "white". The second saw the beginning of "radical", exclusionary feminism. The third one isn't even taken seriously anymore for a large part because of that, it seems.

Second wave feminism took place in Europe and parts of Asia, as sexuality, family, the workplace, reproductive rights, de facto inequalities, and official legal inequalities were the 'main points."

Yeah, it went against the "women should be in the kitchen" viewpoint of many men back then, and was also advocating for pro-choice. Should have included that.

[Valystria]

The whole PIV thing reminds me why I have formed a negative view of the movement as a whole.

Why?
Criticism of PIV is not being PIV-negative, it's just about thinking that PIV shouldn't be the default sex.
Criticism of PIV is criticism of heteronormativity.

Check that
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php? ... 6585301561
It's not against PIV

Can I still have PIV if I want to?
Of course! It’s a free country. Not all women hate PIV; some don’t mind it; some even enjoy it. Most women who enjoy it enjoy clitoris stimulation more. But everyone’s an individual and we all get pleasure in different ways.

How about you shouldn't be telling people how they should have sex. If you were genuinely interested in couples bettering their sex lives you would be telling them to have discussions with each other about what they would both enjoy instead of focusing on women exclusively.

"Have sex this way and not that way, and not this other way. But lets not ever considering encouraging people to have discussions with their partners about how they would enjoy their sexuality more."

And yes, your criticism of PIV comes off as being PIV-negative. Much like how criticism of homosexuality comes off as.... being against homosexuality. Unless I say oh no it's not really against homosexuality, it's against... uhh gender roles. To say criticism of PIV is a criticism of heteronormativity is to say a false equivalency. Criticism of PIV is not necessarily a criticism of heteronormativity so do refrain from making such claims if you have any interest in factuality and accuracy.

[Galloism]

Why?
Criticism of PIV is not being PIV-negative, it's just about thinking that PIV shouldn't be the default sex.
Criticism of PIV is criticism of heteronormativity.

Check that
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php? ... 6585301561
It's not against PIV

Oh, hi there. I see you're back to refusing to answer questions which prove you wrong.

Stop ignoring posts you don't want to answer.

Do tell us.

If you are expecting Chessmistress to suddenly begin to debate honestly and try to argue against things that are damning to her sexist narrative, I think you're going to be waiting a long long time.

[The Serbian Empire]

Oh, hi there. I see you're back to refusing to answer questions which prove you wrong.



Do tell us.

If you are expecting Chessmistress to suddenly begin to debate honestly and try to argue against things that are damning to her sexist narrative, I think you're going to be waiting a long long time.

Hell will freeze over before she debates honestly on topics that go against her viewpoints.

[Fin Dovah Junaar]

If you are expecting Chessmistress to suddenly begin to debate honestly and try to argue against things that are damning to her sexist narrative, I think you're going to be waiting a long long time.

Hell will freeze over before she debates honestly on topics that go against her viewpoints.

So we have until November at the earliest or somethin?

[Luminesa]

Calm.

I agree that abortion is wrong, but screaming and doing exactly what the radical
feminists do, thus sinking to their level, is not going to help you or anyone.
Being pro-life means you want as many people as possible to live. And calling for
their deaths is not cool.

Who said that you are "pro-life" just because you are opposing abortion? Some people oppose it because they oppose women rights, that is out of sheer woman-hate.

What? I don't hate women. I am a woman!

Well, what does an abortion do? (I suppose this is part of another thread, but
answer me that.)

[Galloism]

Who said that you are "pro-life" just because you are opposing abortion? Some people oppose it because they oppose women rights, that is out of sheer woman-hate.

What? I don't hate women. I am a woman!

Well, what does an abortion do? (I suppose this is part of another thread, but
answer me that.)

Ends a pregnancy.